I've put together a very satisfying system, both for music and home theater. The sound is dynamic, with excellent imaging,and soundstaging. Music sounds just great. I've moved into a dedicated room, which helps a lot. I'd appreciate any feedback.
IC's both for the main CD channels, as well as the phono inputs
Equitech Wall panel
Separate circuits for the analog and digital gear. All separated from the lighting, HVAC, etc.
Grand Prix Monaco
Don't know if they help the sound, but they sure look cool.
RPG, ASC Diffuser and absorption panels
I have a dedicated room that is 28' x 22' x 8'. It is a redone basement with brick walls on 2 sides, and drywall on the others, so it is a very live room.. There are asorption panels on the sides and front. There are ASC bass traps in the corners , and diffusers on the ceiling at the first reflection point, and diffusors in the back. It now sounds great. Eventually, I will have it analysed properly.
REL Acoustics Studio 3
Fills in the lower-level information on the Temptations beautifully. A killer in my home theater.
MBL 101e's
Dynamic with great imaging, staging, etc. I can never go back to a speaker in a box. It does need an amp with balls.
MBL 111e
Surround duty
Berkely Audio Alpha DAC
Incredible resolution and tonality. Can't wait to try High-res files.
Blue Smoke Media computer
Outstanding sound with the Berkely DAC. Also, can't beat the convenince
I have a 10db room mode at 31hz and a 5db room mode at 62hz. I used to have a TACT, but I found it degraded the sound so I am not using it anymore. I considered the RPG Modex Plate Type II, but they only go down to 40hz. I was hoping a PARC would solve the problem, but given the responses below, it is not transparent enough. Is there a good solution for a 31hz room mode (besides changing the room)? Thanks,
Deshapiro, Great system! Im very interested in the Berkeley Alpha Dac. Do you run it direct to amp, if not have you tried this and whats your experience with it. Do you think the Blue Smoke is a must or would you get similar performance with a PC and Lynx Aes16e card?
Could you give me a bit more detail about what you noticed changing out the Boulder 2060 for the MBL 9011? I have noticed that some tracks (CD only) sound great and some not so much. It's been a while since I had my tube amps, but I think I remember a few more "gosh that sounds real" moments with the tubes than I do now. I also remember more, gee that sounds bad moments.
Hi Dave, Very nice system. I have to agree with you on the Blue Smoke > AWESOME!!!! After 2 weeks in my system I'm quite impressed > the timber, air, decay > so much improved over standard cd. I'm convinced this is the future.
I have mbl 111's and want to get a center channel to be used in ocnjunction with home theater. I am now using a Dali Halycon c200; which is nice; but want more detail and presence to blend better with the MBL's....also am running 8011 monoblocks. any thoughts or recommendations? Thanks.
Many changes, all to the better. Changed out the Boulder for MBL 9011's This added warmth and kept the resolution. Changed my surround and center amps to MBL 8011's. The biggest change is that I now have a Blue Smoke media server, basically a dedicated computer, running to a Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC. This is an incredible combo. It has all the midrange of the Wavelength, along with all the bass grunt that was missing.
yay! pictures. Great system, Dave. I've noticed in an all MBL system how everyone seems to like adding the 6010d. I suspect that the 9008s will be fine for your room, I don't even have the two added transformers turned on in my romm on the 9011s. Let me know if any dsp stuff looks promising. Theoretically, if they all work off the same clock, and have enough bits, and all you listen to is digital (did I forget any other caveats?), that should be great way to equalize a room.
Well, you naysayers, here's the new picture. As to the Parc, I agree with all tha above comments. Mine is now on the market. I still think that EQ can help. Since I'm going to an all digital chain, I plan to investigate different types of digtal EQ and room correction, PRIOR to the preamp. Hi Mark, nice to see that you're still alive and kicken'.
Molly- My experience mirrors yours to a T. I tried a Parc after I couldn't get rid of a nasty 80Hz bump in my Rives designed room (ironic, eh, have a room designed only to have to use the same co's equilizer, in the face of multiple speaker changes from single driver to active designs) and although the bump was reasonably tamed, I found the same lack of clarity with the Parc in, and most importantly, a definite "hi-fi-ish" and compressed quality to the sound. I didn't like it one bit, sounded like the worst of digital. As unlistenable as the bump. I too went to Real Traps, although I ended up with 15 ( yes you read it correctly) to attenuate the bump. I ended up getting rid of a few of them since that many traps did hurt dynamics somewhat. But I heartily endorse the Real Traps, I found them very effective. I can't say the same about the Parc or frankly Rives room design for that matter.
I just noticed your comments on the MBL 101Es and the Rives PARC. I also own the 101Es and spent a few weeks with the PARC. If you want to see just how much HARM the PARC does, don't hit the by-pass switch. The PARC is still in the signal path. You have to remove it. You would probably be shocked. Yes, it does improve the bass, but the penalty you pay is way too great. One evening, a month or two ago, Eric Lichte, the musical director from Cantus was at my house and we were playing a new Cantus yet to be released CD recorded live in a Midwestern college. He did the recording along with Atkinson (Stereophile) and also used to sing with the group. We were listening to one of the cuts and the voices sounded vague, and Eric commented that there were 7 (as I recall) voices spread across the stage. But it was impossible to know that through the speakers. Something is wrong, he said and he asked me to remove the PARC from the system. First, I did the by-pass. The bass was worse, but nothing much else changed. Them I suggested removing the PARC. I did and we listened again. Voila! 7 voices clearly there. The sound was so much more real. That's the way it sounded when I recorded it, he said. We all (there were 3 of us) looked at each other and laughed. He remarked, "I would never use that equalizer." The sound really is so much better without it, and that is a shame because it does make life easier regarding the bass. I sold the unit two days later and never looked back. It did force me to deal with the bass in another manner. I ended up using 9 RealTraps which cleared up any bass issues - without eq. I hope this helps you out.
Okay,I know the type, lots of money for audio, won't spend 120 bucks for a digital camera to update his pix cause he hasn't used up his One-shot yet. Dude, give us pix of your new system, guys are visual you know!
I have been considering changing my preamp and the ARC 3 and MBL are on my short list. We have the same amp, so I am interested in your impressions. I still have some room issues to work out regarding low frequency, but I feel like some of the texture and liquidity I had with the BAT tubes is missing. I also am lacking a bit of soundstage depth and air between instruments/vocalists. How do you think your preamp journey has affected your sound? I don't know if a tubed pre (or different pre) can add what I am missing. I know our speakers are quite different. Also, do you still use your PARC? Thanks in advance for your response.
Hi, I'm using Apple Lossless through I-tunes. My server is a Mac Mini and that seems to work very well. I'm archiving to a terrabyte hard drive and backing up to a second one, connected by firewire. I love the itunes interface, although there are some niggles. As to electronics, i ma considering a pair of (used) MBL 9011's, but I can never go back to a disc spinner system.
deshapiro, major changes! Just wondering what is the format that you rip your digital music? I have compared my digital music via the Sonos box going through the Esoteric DAC (mp3, VBR 256) against the cd played through the Esoteric and I thought the cd sounded better. what I noticed was better detail (makes sense because I am compressing to mp3) as well as overall depth of the soundstage. I would like to try and convert all my music over to WAV or FLAC but I have too much music (almost 10K cds). Storage would become a serious issues. Also, because of my large library, I need to have the tagging features that mp3 allows. From what I understand, FLAC tagging is pretty limited.
Anyway, great system! Heck, the previous one you had was great as well!
BTW, are you considering going to all MBL electronics?
System edited: I've done some major changes. The first was switching out the Esoteric X-01 Limited for a Wavelength Audio Crimson, a computer-based tubed-output DAC. The sound only had to be as good as what I had, given the conveneince facor. Guess what, it's better. Incredible presence, solid images hanging in the air, imaging, soundstaging, etc. The only problem was a muting of bass dynamics. Ultimately, I switched out the Arc Ref3 preamp for an MBL 6010D and I couln't be happier. All the bass slam reappeared, without loss of detail or introduction of any graininess.
Great system you got there. Just wondering if you are using any power cords for your equipment. If yes, I would appreciate if you could let me know whether they made a noticeable(if not substantial) difference.
bflowers I have noticed careful toe-in with my mbl's and I do mean careful, has made a huge difference with the bass. I spent the better part of two days turning them and moving them to get very good, very well-defined bass. I have tube traps and got rid of them. Not that I couldn;t get better bass perhaps, I just don't want to add stuff in the signal path...I tried a tact with WP 6.0s, after awhile, I could hear it clearly and not in such a good way. Course that was a long time ago, and the PARC is supposed to be a different animal...I just found being very very careful with placement let me not need the REK anymore, and not lust after an equalizer...the speakers are 4 ft into the room.
I am thinking about trying to do something to deal with bass nodes in my room. Thats probably the only remaining significant problem with my system. I have some ASC product in the works which should be delivered in about three weeks. I already got a pair of 16in rounds behind the main speakers with has made a slight improvement. A friend of mine swears by his TACT unit, but I noticed you use the PARC. My understanding is that this unit only deals with low frequency and could be preferable to full spectrum EQ. I would appreciate your experience with the PARC as well as with any other EQ device.
Bflowers, the Symposium 2;s are not very tall, so I just slip one in front, and then two in back. Microdynamics on the MBLs improved noticeably, the bass clarified a bit, and I think the soundstage deepened a smidgeon. On the REL, I put one under each foot for 4 total. The cheaper, bigger version of the Rollerblocks. That was just a huge difference in tonally making the sub sing. The harmonics became more natural, and the bass drum sounded much more harmonically rich, with a more extended decay. Probably the most immediately noticeable tweak I have ever done, with no drawbacks, in fact I noticed waay more positive difference with 200 bucks of rollerblocks than I did with adding the Synergistic Rel sub cable,
Chrisla What did you notice with the rollerblocks? And how did you get the speakers not to fall over:o) I have a REL Studio III and Wilson Maxx 2's. Thanks
